Oct 28 – Justice (re-edited)

In the quiet platitude of one's own solitary silence, a man either prays or masturbates.


Objects could not come “into being” nor even be recognized as objects until consciousness became fully internalized as one’s “narrative self-awareness” with the clear distinction between “I” and “me” in the heart, mind, and soul of man. Before such self-awareness roused the First Subjective Man to the apparent reality of himself and, crucially, his own physical body, “objects” did not “exist” at all, at least not in the idealized or concretized form that the Subjective Man of today would in any way recognize them. Whatever was “before” the First Subject, it was indubitably a boundless, ageless, deathless, formless ecstatic mass of undelineated, chaotic, incoherent, incongruent, disintegrated, disordered, disembodiedness without line, angle, distinction, contrast, boundary, beginning, middle, and end whose infinite unboundedness that only God – disembodied, immaterial, formless, boundless, infinite, universal, objective, and eternal – could sufficiently inhabit, navigate, and abide, specifically as God.


Conflict, as Heraclitus rightly surmised, is indeed the father and king of all, or at least “the all” of the living and embodied, the real and actual. For without the whirling, dueling polarity of opposites striving in constant animosity and struggle, could the ordered, coherent, and unavoidable synthesis of their struggle be actualized into being, the products of that actualization, which is every object, thing, and thought that ever was, is, or could be. As such, in the chaotic disorder that “preceded” the First Subject did no conflict at all exist, and thus no synthesis, no reconciliation, no justice, or at least none that the Subject Man – as he presently exists – could in any way perceive. For before thought, all things belonged implicitly to the Lord.

Chaos, therefore, is not injustice but the complete and utter lack of any perceivable struggle whatsoever at all, insofar as no “thing” can even exist as a “thing” in the peaceful tranquility of “thinglessness.”


Injustice is “merely” the unsatisfactory reconciliation or irreconcilability of opposites, while chaos is simply “thinglessness” or, more precisely “manlessness,” the conspicuous absence of the synthesizing impetus of the autonomic teleologization of man’s psychological and emotional facilities.

For man, as the embodied representation of embodiment itself, is justice, without whom no thing could exist achieve legal justification for existing in the first place.

Justice then, from this teleological perspective – so primordial and fundamental to the experience and “purpose” of man – is, like breathing, not something that one consciously “does” or willfully “carries out” per se, but what one essentially “is” and can in no other way be, not only with regards to himself, but to the sun, moon, stars, earth, all things seen and unseen.


If a man, therefore, does not instinctively allow himself to seek and practice justice and by it, synthesis and reconciliation (where and in whatever form he or it may find it) he is not a “real”, or in this case “actual”, man.


The Archaic Greek, so close to the beginning and nearest the Source of life not yet marred and disfigured by the repeated attempts by the Subjective Man to apprehend its impossible essence, was justified in his use of the term “alatheia” to describe the way in which the Greeks both perceived truth and apprehended its nature; truth which was considered by them to be a “disclosure,” an “uncovering,” or “re-awakening to what they had always known” but was simply forgotten; truth which contemporary man, so very far from said beginning, and being thus distant from said Source and ruined by the irreparable memetic reinventions, renovations, revisions, revelations, refinements, and revolutions of the most well-intentioned of individuals over the past three and a half millennia, rightly perceive truth in our present dispensation to be the creative “work” of “someone” or “something” that had not been there before the first man or mind had conceived it through the poiesis of his will.


Before the First Subject Man when he was yet still merely an object, consciousness self-awareness (and thus Self-Responsibility) dwelt outside the body and mind of man in the incorporeal domain of what would later be called “the gods” who were “everywhere” an “in everything” and were themselves all things, insofar as no “real” time, place, space or thing had yet to exist in actual embodied form, “things” that were yet unperceivable by and to the boundlessness of objective man and the boundaryless incongruence of his senses.

Indeed, the entire historical process of self-awareness can partly be seen as the gradual migration of self-consciousness from outside of the body, mind, and being of man to inside, from immaterial incorporeality toward embodied corporeality, from “the gods” to man the individual, a process which materially culminates when “The Embodied” realize themselves as “gods,” which is to say, creators of Truth and Reality, at which point the process begins to reverse and unwind itself in the opposite direction from whence it came, that which immaterially culminates when the Gods – who, it must be emphasized, until that point do not consider themselves as such – realize their creative godhood which sends the unfoldment of self-awareness back the other way upon its opposite, inevitable and eternal course.


Thus did the First Subject Man largely perceive “things,” “ideas,” “feelings,” and “emotions” as both originating, approaching, and appearing to him “from outside”, as foreign, apart, distinct, other, and separate from him, even those feelings, emotions, sensations, and bodily experiences that would later be “obvious” to have originated inside, among, and because of his physical body.

The evolution, then, of thought and more specifically, perception and its associated feelings and emotions is the transmutation of the outer to the inner, the revelation of “something,” which is to say, the experience of phenomena from the outside to inside, exteriority to interiority and all the requisite implications that such a transformation entails, specifically with regards to the emergence of morals, ethics, values, and the responsibility that such things place upon the heart, mind, and literal shoulders of man.


In the quiet platitude of one’s own solitary silence, a man either prays or masturbates.


When self-awareness was external to man, justice was enacted in a reasonable, rational, orderly, and coherent way was impossible. Under this disposition, only the gods could exercise justice, and by that, largely to the bewilderment and inconsistency of man. However, when consciousness became fully internalized did justice, and by it, metaphysical law, objective jurisprudence, and teleological order pass from gods to man and by it, the redefinition of rightness, soundness, fairness, virtue, character and, perhaps most crucially, the “righteousness” by which a given congress of subjective individuals might cohesively amalgamate, and successfully know themselves as such a congress and thus potentially persist as one into the uncertain future.